He is a crybaby, so no thanks. So sick and tired of people yelling discrimination when nothing happened. What does that do to those poor people who really are discriminated against? It weakens their argument, that's what. Look at Brian Banks...

" Ayanbadejo, a highly visible defender of gay rights and same-sex marriage, told Newsday on Thursday he thinks his outspoken advocacy was one of the reasons the Baltimore Ravens released him."

He's not wrong in that it was a likely factor. And actually, if you read the quote, he didn't use it as a crutch. He acknowledged it as a contributing factor. A 36-yr-old ST player due to make over $1M was likely to be cut anyway. His outspoken advocacy is likely to hinder his chances of making a 2013 roster as much as his age.

Hawk Finn wrote:He's not wrong in that it was a likely factor. And actually, if you read the quote, he didn't use it as a crutch. He acknowledged it as a contributing factor. A 36-yr-old ST player due to make over $1M was likely to be cut anyway. His outspoken advocacy is likely to hinder his chances of making a 2013 roster as much as his age.

I disagree. He was cut because of his age and lack of production. To go out in public and make a statement like that is to throw gas on an already big flame. It was unprofessional and uncalled for, especially after all of the work the NFL does to help charities and motivate children to be healthy. They are a huge target and guy took his shot at them.

An Athlete is damned if you do, damned if you don't. Some folks want them to use their position to speak out for causes (see criticism of MJ and Tiger Woods from some minorities), others want them to be mute on social issues, such as Kluwe and Ayanbadejo.

Personally, I don't need them to speak out for others nor to limit their freedom of speech. I tend to just dismiss it since I am only here for the sports. Good on you if you can champion a cause for the disabled or poor or those without a voice. I know how to filter the ESPNs of the world and various reporting agencies that feel these items should be on a loop.

Ravens judged him to no longer be an asset for their team. What ever the reason, he gets to move on and if this is it as far as being a paid professional best of luck continuing his stance to change the world. His audience will be reduced because he will now be just a common Joe.

ivotuk wrote:He is a crybaby, so no thanks. So sick and tired of people yelling discrimination when nothing happened. What does that do to those poor people who really are discriminated against? It weakens their argument, that's what. Look at Brian Banks...

" Ayanbadejo, a highly visible defender of gay rights and same-sex marriage, told Newsday on Thursday he thinks his outspoken advocacy was one of the reasons the Baltimore Ravens released him."

Too bad you read one story and took the bait. He has called this report false and said the opposite. He also sent out a series of tweets thanking the Ravens and letting it be known how supportive they were while he was speaking out.

ivotuk wrote:He is a crybaby, so no thanks. So sick and tired of people yelling discrimination when nothing happened. What does that do to those poor people who really are discriminated against? It weakens their argument, that's what. Look at Brian Banks...

" Ayanbadejo, a highly visible defender of gay rights and same-sex marriage, told Newsday on Thursday he thinks his outspoken advocacy was one of the reasons the Baltimore Ravens released him."

Too bad you read one story and took the bait. He has called this report false and said the opposite. He also sent out a series of tweets thanking the Ravens and letting it be known how supportive they were while he was speaking out.

Well even if he read the whole thing he sounds pretty determined to dislike the guy. Not sure it would have made a difference.

He's a good player, and would add great depth, I wouldn't be against having him here.

GREEDY PUNK PAUL ALLEN, THIS LOSS IS ON YOU."I don't give a crap WHAT you gotta pay, Kam is worth it and I don't want to lose a shot at another SB cuz you - a freaking BILLIONAIRE, are cheapskating Kam over a freaking $900,000.You cheapskate." SalishHawkFan SEP 13, 2015 1:47 PM

ivotuk wrote:He is a crybaby, so no thanks. So sick and tired of people yelling discrimination when nothing happened. What does that do to those poor people who really are discriminated against? It weakens their argument, that's what. Look at Brian Banks...

" Ayanbadejo, a highly visible defender of gay rights and same-sex marriage, told Newsday on Thursday he thinks his outspoken advocacy was one of the reasons the Baltimore Ravens released him."

Too bad you read one story and took the bait. He has called this report false and said the opposite. He also sent out a series of tweets thanking the Ravens and letting it be known how supportive they were while he was speaking out.

Of course he did...

GREEDY PUNK PAUL ALLEN, THIS LOSS IS ON YOU."I don't give a crap WHAT you gotta pay, Kam is worth it and I don't want to lose a shot at another SB cuz you - a freaking BILLIONAIRE, are cheapskating Kam over a freaking $900,000.You cheapskate." SalishHawkFan SEP 13, 2015 1:47 PM

Your guys' blind support for the guy is just silly. He had to have realized that after the Ravens allowed some very productive guys leave; that his days were numbered. How is it discrimination (whether it is considered discrimination by the player or not) if he was cut the same year Bernard Pollard and Ed Reed weren't retained? They were a helluva lot more integral to the success of the Ravens than Ayanbadejo at age 36 making $$$mil. IMO. Think before you let your bias show, so colorfully.

Where are people coming from with this 'discrimination' angle? Not once in any quote attributed to him did I read that word. Further, the article itself states that he understood the move from a football perspective. He only stated that the attention his stance draws isn't something that teams desire (which is correct). Seems the only "silly" thing here is people who seemingly choose to focus on the headline and editorial spin (both beyond his control) rather than the man's words themselves. And I'm the blind supporter?

Yes, I have a dog in this fight. Do his detractors? Pot meets kettle. Maybe this is better suited for PWR.

Hawk Finn wrote:Where are people coming from with this 'discrimination' angle? Not once in any quote attributed to him did I read that word. Further, the article itself states that he understood the move from a football perspective. He only stated that the attention his stance draws isn't something that teams desire (which is correct). Seems the only "silly" thing here is people who seemingly choose to focus on the headline and editorial spin (both beyond his control) rather than the man's words themselves. And I'm the blind supporter?

Yes, I have a dog in this fight. Do his detractors? Pot meets kettle. Maybe this is better suited for PWR.

Finn, they read an article on the internet that said he said it. Case closed.

I was arguing against Hawk Finn's "contributing factor" statement. If it was a contributing factor in their decision, it is still discrimination. And I'm confident that it wasn't even considered. The NFL pays PROFESSIONALS to manage their organizations; those who were unhappy with the value of play Ayanbadejo provided. Case closed.

The same proffesionals that asked Dez Bryant if his mom was a whore? Or the proffesionals that were asking kids at this years combine abouy their sexual orientation? Also its the owners that pay the proffesionals.

To take off CALI's comments, these same professionals had to institute a formal rule to preclude them from considering race when hiring their respective staffs, though the perceived effectiveness of said rule is underwhelming. I don't think it's beneath them to consider hot-button social issues when making roster decisions (which, for the record, I don't see as wrong).

That said, I still don't see this as a discrimination issue; no one is implying that the Ravens cut him because they are at odds with his stance, nor do I believe that Ayanbadejo feels that way. He specifically acknowledged his age, role, and salary as key factors. The article reads as if the reporter specifically asked him whether he felt his advocacy played a part, to which he responded affirmative. That doesn't mean he felt is was the sole reason, nor does it mean he felt it was even a significant reason. However, it is highly likely that the potential for distraction caused by his championing may have been perceived as unhealthy for the organization. My opinion is that to outright dismiss it as a consideration at all is short-sighted.

I have a sneaking suspicion that if the interview is released verbatim - in context, without the editorial spin - the message will be much different. I have been wrong once before, but to imply that it could happen twice is just grasping at straws.

Of course the owners pay the professionals. The owners are still mandated by the NFL to adhere to the rules of a workplace. No need to get into the semantics that much. The NFL as an organization has ALL the say over how the FO handles their business in the league. And I love how you go right into that rhetoric... One second I'm not supposed to believe an article I read on the internet regarding the players, and now I am when it suits your agenda?! Let it go big boy!

It seems that the thread has been derailed, and I fully acknowledge that it's my fault for expressing my personal feelings in the OP instead of posing this question directly. In an effort to get this back to football:

If the 'Hawks were to sign him to a vet minimum deal for a role similar to BAL as ST ace and LB depth, would you like the move? Why or why not?